WaPo calls for 2007 Nobel Prize to be rescinded

The greatest scandal connected to global warming is not exaggeration, fraud or destruction of data to conceal the weakness of the argument. It is those who are personally profiting from promoting this fantasy at the expense of the rest of us.

Al Gore is the most visible beneficiary. The world’s greatest climate-change fear-monger has amassed millions in book sales and speaking fees. His science-fiction movie, “An Inconvenient Truth,” won an Academy Award for best documentary and 21 other film awards. He was co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his “efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.”

Meanwhile, Mr. Gore was laying his own foundations. As he was whipping up hysteria over climate change, he cannily invested in “green” firms that stood to profit in the hundreds of millions of dollars (if not more) from increased government regulations and sweetheart deals from connected politicians and bureaucrats. The multimillionaire climate dilettante was given a free pass by reporters, who refused to ask him hard questions about the degree to which he was profiting from the panic he was causing.

[…]

Given the clear conflicts of interest of those who both promote and profit from climate-change alarmism, the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize should be rescinded.

Like this:

Related

6 Responses to “WaPo calls for 2007 Nobel Prize to be rescinded”

I think the credibility of this prize is pretty well shot for most people. The picture of Gore and Pachauri showing off their prize sure did it for me. These people have lost their moral compass, if, indeed, they ever possessed one. Sadly, one begins to wonder which institutions or organizations haven’t been corrupted by these fraudsters.

I agree. The Nobel Peace Prize Committee has made many questionable choices over the years, with the Al Gore/IPCC selection being particularly egregious.

Nonetheless, the prize does have some status with the general public which has little interest in questioning their choices. Rescinding Gore’s prize would completely erode any credibility he might have left, and hopefully extinguish the AGW hysteria and the bad policy choices it has fed.

My, my, some very frank admissions by a climate change policy advisor! It certainly explains what is happening in energy policies around the world. It appears they have been planning this carbon emissions money-making scheme and the capture of energy agencies since the 1980’s.

“It is important, however, for you check my observation, that most climate change since the late 1980s has been government- and grant- funded with the clearly stated objective that it must support a decarbonisation agenda for the energy sector.”

“Their survival, and the livelihoods of their employees, depends on delivering what policy makers think they want. It becomes hazardous to speak truth to power. In the area of energy policy, there are particular problems since the familiar lobbies of the privatised energy industries have been joined by new pressure groups. As the justification for policies comes to rely increasingly on “environmental” arguments, a host of NGOs, often with electorally appealing single-issue concerns and deceptively simple solutions, begin to raise their voices. The politics have become very difficult, and it is not clear that the traditional structures can cope. The responsibility for excessive pressure…”